In the end, a competing “compromise” measure was passed in November 2011, but as we warned at the time, the measure did too little to address the city’s growing pension costs. Next year, pension costs will still jump by $100 million. Under the measure that passed, employees will contribute only 1.1 percent more of their income to cover these additional costs — a smaller percentage than what our measure would have required.

Some argue that pension reform unfairly targets government workers by modifying pension formulas that have been used for decades. But unless states and cities begin fixing their pension problems, escalating pension costs will ultimately force cities to confront this choice: Make huge service cuts and layoffs, or be unable to meet the city’s retirement obligations to its retired workers. That’s why we have to act now.

In today’s challenging economy, with high unemployment and huge government deficits, progressives have a strong interest in ensuring that government employee pension systems remain viable. Having a sustainable pension fund that protects the futures of workers without bankrupting cities is a progressive value. Progressives should also support ending pension abuses that only benefit a small number of workers at the expense of taxpayers and other workers who contribute to the fund. Pension reform is one step, among others, that must be taken to restore fiscal stability to our cities.